Consumer panel orders Wockhardt Hospitals to pay ₹18 lakh for patient's death due to ICU delay

Hindustan Times

29-07-2025

Mumbai, The Maharashtra consumer commission has held Wockhardt Hospitals, Nashik, guilty of deficiency in service for delay in shifting a young patient to the ICU, which led to his death. Consumer panel orders Wockhardt Hospitals to pay
₹ 18 lakh for patient's death due to ICU delay
Patients have a "right to receive competent care and that too, in time as required", the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission stated in its order passed earlier this month.
The hospital has been directed to pay a compensation of ₹18 lakh to the victim's family for mental agony and harassment.
As per the complaint filed by the victim's father, his son was admitted to Wockhardt Hospitals in Nashik on April 15, 2010, after suffering a nosebleed.
The complainant claimed that his son's condition deteriorated significantly in the wee hours of April 16, when he complained of chest pain and uneasiness after collapsing while going to the bathroom.
Despite his worsening condition, the patient was not admitted to the ICU until 7 am on April 16, he said.
He alleged that the hospital unnecessarily continued treatment until afternoon to create evidence, even though he believed his son died around 8.30 am.
The patient was officially declared dead at 12.50 pm, he said. The complainant accused the hospital and its doctors of gross medical negligence and deficiency in service.
The patient required immediate ICU monitoring, but the hospital failed to admit him promptly despite his deteriorating condition. The patient eventually suffered a cardiac arrest and died.
The complainant approached the state commission after the district forum had dismissed his plea.
Wockhardt Hospitals and the respondent doctors denied any negligence, asserting that all protocols were followed.
They contended that the patient's death was due to his long-standing medical conditions and non-compliance, specifically his unilateral decision to stop prescribed anti-hypertensive medication, which led to accelerated hypertension and a fatal heart attack.
The hospital claimed that the patient's father had refused ICU admission.
The commission, however, noted that no documentary proof was provided by the hospital to substantiate this claim.
While it noted that the treating doctors exercised their utmost qualification, skill and showed no negligence, it held that the hospital's failure to shift the patient to the ICU in time, "amounts to the deficiency of services towards the patient as well as the complainant, which ultimately led to loss of a life".
The commission emphasised that consent for ICU admission is not a legal requirement in life-threatening emergencies, citing the Supreme Court rulings which mandate immediate treatment in emergencies, even without consent, if delay can be fatal.
The right to emergency medical care is a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, the commission stated.
Considering the mental agony and harassment suffered by the deceased's family, the commission directed the hospital to pay them compensation of ₹18 lakh with 6 per cent interest per annum from October 26, 2010, until the realisation of the amount.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.